Judgement

Appeal (No. 58 of 1941), by special leave, from a decree of the High Court (May 12, 1938) which affirmed a decree of the Subordinate Judge at Agra (September 12, 1936).

The following facts are taken from the judgment of the Judicial Committee This appeal arose out of an execution application made by the appellants1 father, Hemraj, since deceased, for the execution of a money decree which he had obtained against one Danpal in the court of the Subordinate Judge of Agra, afterwards confirmed on appeal against the present respondents, the sons of Danpal, by the attachment and sale of the ancestral property in their hands. The parties were governed by the Mitakshara law. The question for determination was whether the respondents could lawfully object to the execution of the decree on the ground that, having regard to the nature of the judgment debt, the rule of the pious obligation of a son under the Hindu law to pay his fathers debt did not apply to this case; or, in other words, was the debt in respect of which the decree was obtained an avyavaharika debt ? Hemraj and Danpal, with others, formed a joint Hindu family. In 1925, a suit was instituted in the Court of the Subordi